The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1887-12-27


BIckERToN J.
laiaaa II tie cooz PEI McCULLTJ.
= For the statement of facts in the
! sc we refer 10 the opinion of the
lief Justice and Chancellor. whose
a cree Is here appealed from.
IN twill be seen from it that the cues
IN in controversy is whether the adj
vanees made by the plantation
agents, Messrs. Grinbaum & Co.
after the appointment of a receiver
are lien on the property, taking
precedence of the mortgages exist
inE at the date of the appointment
This comes up on the motion for
distribution of the proceeds of the
sale Of the plantation. 1t is claimed
lhy counsel for Messrs. Grinbaum
III Co., that the Court should see to
payment from money in its
Is Of debts which it has autho-
d the receiver to contract.
he power given to the receiver
limited to the terms expressed in
order. We quote what is neees-
~ in this connection. The re-
liver Is "to take possession Of the
toney assets and other property OF
Y Inc Hama Plantation with
over 10 make such contracts as he
Lay deem proper for obtaining
"A. oNney 10 be advanced for CARRYING
~ said plantation, including the
tal and necessary OUTLAWS thereon
s5r labor, salaries, rents, taxes and
@--lerwise and for the sale Of the su-
t-ars TO be made thereon, but no I'M
usual outlay for improvements or
Otherwise upon said property ex-
-aiing in any one item the
sum of FIVE hundred dollars shall
he made without the express
aF7roval of this Court. and with
power 10 pay out of the moneys
10 be obtained the interest rs ii
shall from time TO time become pay
able upon the mortgages now out
sanding upon said plantation
and with power and obligation gene
rally TO do and perform the duties
lof a receiver in equity. And fur
iJher that the receiver do take out
of the proceeds Of said property
monthly sum for his compensation
and reasonable travelling ex-
Ipenses and that a monthly
sum be allowed out of the receipts
/ Of said property for the support and
maintenance Of the widow and child
lCf August Unna."
The language of Brewer J. in
4 Wabash II. r. et az V. Central Trust
t0.. - Federal Reporter p. %
cited in support of the claim here
sade. very. carefully limits the duty
the Court TO supporting obliga-
pms Of receivers above existing
Il sAsnS TO such aS have been author
lied TO be made superior 10 them.
in High on Receivers 2 394 a and
g. it j. admitted that while indefen-
Sllie upon principle it is neverthe-
's~s established by authority that
secured debts in certain circum-
auee> occurring in railway receive
rships may be preferred TO mort
cages and that this Is based on the
principle that the court having IN
der,a6en the management of the
railway at the request and for the
benefit Of the mortgage creditors all
Necessary expenses incurred in such 1
malagement are a prior charge on /
the property. But TO warrant the |
payment Of the receivers operating |
expenses as for money advanced |
supplies and damages incurred out |
Of the corpus of the mortgaged |
4 property in preference to the bond
4 holders, such privity must be spec
ialiy authorized by the Court, and it |
cannot be allowed merely under an
order authorizing him to pay operat-
ng expenses out of income.
In FoSdick V. .SchQH 80 L. 5. Sup.
-t. al page 253 Chief Justice Waite
says 4" The mortgage has his strict
rights which he may enforce in the
lr5ilary way. If he asks nc fayors
he need grant none. But if he calls
-p0n a Court Of Chancery TO put
forth its extraordinary powers, and
giant him purely equitable re-
LIEF 10y appointment of a receiYer),
Sc may with propriety be required
= submit TO the operation Of 4 rule
! iziich always applies in such cases,
and do equity in order to get
equity"
If in the case before US it We're
The fact that at the death of Mr..
august Tnna and on the surviving
Eartner coming in with bill for the
appointment of . receiver TO carry
n the plantation, the mortgages
lad Joined in the application, as
measure needed TO save their Inte-
rests. the law above cited would re-
n I